NationStates

---

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly: We are aware of the Ban on Conversion Therapy. My colleagues will be seeking to repeal that shortly after the passage of this - which, as far as I know, is more wide-reaching.

OOC: Refer to Victor Madrigal-Borloz's findings on Practices of so-called "conversion therapy" and the Ban Conversion Therapy campaign. Regarding Article c, see GA#91.

End Conversion Therapy
A resolution to improve worldwide human sapient and civil rights.

Category: Civil Rights

Strength: Mild

Proposed by: Tinhampton

---

Believing that LGBTQ+ people should not be persecuted simply for being LGBTQ+, the General Assembly hereby:

1. defines "conversion therapy" as those interventions meant to alter or reverse any person's sexual orientation or gender identity,
2. requires member states to prohibit the practice and advertisement of conversion therapy in all circumstances,
3. clarifies that this resolution does not affect the right of willing individuals to seek and receive gender-adequation or -affirmation procedures, and
4. strongly recommends that members provide all necessary and relevant support to those who have already undergone, or are likely to undergo, conversion therapy.

"How is this any different to the current active resolution on this topic, and how does it not duplicate it wholly? The only difference I can see the definition of conversion therapy being slightly altered to include gender expression, which almost-certainly either contradicts article c, bans member-states from shaving the heads of prisoners or making them wear clothes that 'alter their gender expression', or does nothing GA#437 does not do. This repeal-replace effort appears to be nothing more than a badge hunt attempt, and replaces a resolution with a better argument in the preamble for a poorer one."

OOC: Upon further reading, I noticed that this proposal would include banning conversion therapy performed by private institutions, something GA#437 does not cover. I will maintain opposition to this repeal-replace effort as long as 'gender expression' remains in the proposal's definition, as it is a vague term that can create more problems than it solves.

Marxist Germany wrote:OOC: I will maintain opposition to this repeal-replace effort as long as 'gender expression' remains in the proposal's definition, as it is a vague term that can create more problems than it solves.

OOC: I know you think transgender people are mentally ill (fairly sure I have that TG somewhere still), but you might still want to re-read some stuff before making strange claims. Just because you don't know how to express your gender (if that's not the case, then you should have a clear idea of what it means?), doesn't mean "gender expression" was a vague term or difficult to understand generally speaking.

Like the GenSec stance on the ideological ban rule, as long as you don't ban Concept A entirely, you can still ban key components of it. So while some people somewhere might claim hair length (your shaving prisoners example) as their main way to express their gender, that's unlikely to be the only way to express one's gender except in some extreme RP reality, which I keep getting told proposal writers don't need to care about, really.

And the other resolution mentioned bans conversion therapy on minors. This bans it entirely when done as an "intervention" - which means without the agreed-upon consent from the target person.

I am very suspicious of Tintin being the one to do this, just like I was suspicious of UM writing up the original, but I guess even a blind chicken will find some grains if it keeps pecking at everything, so it's within possibilities that she's actually somehow sincere with this.

Dame Allania Trueblood wanders in, then stops to read the resolution.

"Hmm... If you repeal the previous to replace with this one, you have my full support."

OOC: Even if Tin is just doing this for badge hunting, I have to admit this is a good replacement for the existing one. I see no reason not to go ahead with it.

Smith: That's the plan, Trueblood... it's just that Lydia's planning to submit the repeal after we get this passed. Also cheers, Linda.

Araraukar wrote:

Marxist Germany wrote:OOC: I will maintain opposition to this repeal-replace effort as long as 'gender expression' remains in the proposal's definition, as it is a vague term that can create more problems than it solves.

OOC: I know you think transgender people are mentally ill (fairly sure I have that TG somewhere still), but you might still want to re-read some stuff before making strange claims. Just because you don't know how to express your gender (if that's not the case, then you should have a clear idea of what it means?), doesn't mean "gender expression" was a vague term or difficult to understand generally speaking.

Like the GenSec stance on the ideological ban rule, as long as you don't ban Concept A entirely, you can still ban key components of it. So while some people somewhere might claim hair length (your shaving prisoners example) as their main way to express their gender, that's unlikely to be the only way to express one's gender except in some extreme RP reality, which I keep getting told proposal writers don't need to care about, really.

And the other resolution mentioned bans conversion therapy on minors. This bans it entirely when done as an "intervention" - which means without the agreed-upon consent from the target person.

I am very suspicious of Tintin being the one to do this, just like I was suspicious of UM writing up the original, but I guess even a blind chicken will find some grains if it keeps pecking at everything, so it's within possibilities that she's actually somehow sincere with this.

OOC: To respond to your last point, I did acknowledge that I initially misread GA#437, and that this goes further in banning conversion therapy.

Regarding 'gender expression', here are several definitions I collected from a variety of sources:

1. Gender expression is how you demonstrate your gender (based on social constructs within the culture) through the ways you act, dress, behave, and interact.

2. Gender expression refers to the ways that people present their gender identity to the world. This may be through clothing, haircuts, behaviors, and other choices. Many people choose to express themselves in a way that matches societal expectations for their gender identity.

3. Gender expression refers to things like dress, attitudes, and behaviors that we choose to display.

4. Gender expression is how a person presents gender outwardly, through behavior, clothing, voice or other perceived characteristics. Society identifies these cues as masculine or feminine, although what is considered masculine or feminine changes over time and varies by culture.

As you can see, gender expression is widely regarded to include outward appearance, such as haircuts and clothing.

"For once, we agree with the German delegation. Gender expression is a rather broad umbrella, and prohibiting anything which alters it as 'conversion therapy' would make it illegal to set various dress codes, including for prison inmates and military members."

Ambassador Tav: We eagerly see the repeal of the current conversion therapy resolution looks in relation to this proposed replacement that addresses any prior flaws. For now, tentative support.

“I am reluctantly opposed for so long as ‘gender expression’ remains in the legislation, unless it is defined in the proposal to specify the meaning.”

Pardon me, but does this ban all conversion therapy even if one who’s planning to undergo it is a fully mentally capable adult?

"gender expression" nixed. Article c was earlier amended to instead refer to "gender-adequation or -affirmation procedures" to reflect widespread, more modern language preferences.

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:Pardon me, but does this ban all conversion therapy even if one who’s planning to undergo it is a fully mentally capable adult?

Why should it not? BoCT doesn't

Tinhampton wrote:Why should it not? BoCT doesn't

So, let this sink in, Ambassador, this assembly legalizes literal suicide which, I hope you agree, if far more hurtful and dangerous to people than conversion therapy, but bans this? It is my humble believe that an adult and fully mentally capable person should be able to do with his body whatever he wishes to. Sure, conversion therapy can be harmful to some people, but if that’s what they want to to that’s their right. Sure, my superiors are not of the same opinion on the matter, but I believe that you don’t want me to read all of the shit they’ve written for me, do you?

"Would you like to outlaw suicide? The fuck are you going to do to a dead body?"

Smith: I refer all of you to Ambassador Eduard Heir's resolution on A Decriminalization of Suicide.

"I am aware of that resolution ambassador, and I believe criminalization of suicide to be bad."

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:

Tinhampton wrote:Why should it not? BoCT doesn't

So, let this sink in, Ambassador, this assembly legalizes literal suicide which, I hope you agree, if far more hurtful and dangerous to people than conversion therapy, but bans this? It is my humble believe that an adult and fully mentally capable person should be able to do with his body whatever he wishes to. Sure, conversion therapy can be harmful to some people, but if that’s what they want to to that’s their right. Sure, my superiors are not of the same opinion on the matter, but I believe that you don’t want me to read all of the shit they’ve written for me, do you?

Dame Allania raises her eyebrow at this argument.

"This assembly also bans torture, which conversion therapy is classified as within Trellania. Are you saying that because suicide is legal and protected, you should have the right to be waterboarded by request?"

Jedinsto wrote:"Would you like to outlaw suicide? The fuck are you going to do to a dead body?"

Well, we have our potential methods...- would she say with a sly look at the book “Distance Controlling of Neural Connections: Theory and Practice” she was avidly reading before the meeting
OOC: I mean in NS there is shit like sapient plants so why is this impossible from a technological perspective

Jedinsto wrote:"I am aware of that resolution ambassador, and I believe criminalization of suicide to be bad."

So we all agree that a fully mentally developed sentient being capable of reason should be free in what he does with his body and mental health right?

Trellania wrote:Dame Allania raises her eyebrow at this argument.

"This assembly also bans torture, which conversion therapy is classified as within Trellania. Are you saying that because suicide is legal and protected, you should have the right to be waterboarded by request?"

If that’s someone’s kink than yes, sure, why not. I mean that proposal against corporal punishment included special clause about this... After all you wouldn’t ban consensual BSDM, would you?

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:If that’s someone’s kink than yes, sure, why not. I mean that proposal against corporal punishment included special clause about this... After all you wouldn’t ban consensual BSDM, would you?

"Any BDSM practicioner knows there is a galaxy of difference between BDSM and torture. The rules of BDSM include provisions for safety and sanity; if you are mentally damaging your partner, you are not obeying the sane portion. Torture inherently damages the sanity of those it is used upon. Thus why we classify conversion therapy as torture.

"Also, Ambassador, the fact you did not know the difference between BDSM and torture... Well, if you show up to any BDSM clubs in Trellania, at minimum you will be arrested on sight. I will make certain details about you, including an accurate description, are circulated as soon as discussion about this proposal is concluded. And, no, we will not extend diplomatic immunity to you."

Trellania wrote:"Any BDSM practicioner knows there is a galaxy of difference between BDSM and torture. The rules of BDSM include provisions for safety and sanity; if you are mentally damaging your partner, you are not obeying the sane portion. Torture inherently damages the sanity of those it is used upon. Thus why we classify conversion therapy as torture.

"Also, Ambassador, the fact you did not know the difference between BDSM and torture... Well, if you show up to any BDSM clubs in Trellania, at minimum you will be arrested on sight. I will make certain details about you, including an accurate description, are circulated as soon as discussion about this proposal is concluded. And, no, we will not extend diplomatic immunity to you."

I’m no BSDM practitioner, comrade. If I was one I would’nt have ended in my department- I probably wouldn’t even have had a job.

Which brings me to my next question: does this resolution believes that a person, being fully informed about the specifics and the consequences of his decision still has to be essentially protected from harming oneself?

Eh, it’s not like I am giver diplomatic immunity to begin with, so I don’t care...

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:I’m no BSDM practitioner, comrade. If I was one I would’nt have ended in my department- I probably wouldn’t even have had a job.

Which brings me to my next question: does this resolution believes that a person, being fully informed about the specifics and the consequences of his decision still has to be essentially protected from harming oneself?

Eh, it’s not like I am giver diplomatic immunity to begin with, so I don’t care...

"It is for the best. You look like someone who's will would shatter within the first ten minutes anyway.

"I do not believe any person of rational mind would make the decision this resolution seeks to outlaw to begin with. And those not of rational mind would not be of sufficient mindset to be making choices of their own free will anyway. So, I really don't see your question as having a possible answer due to its basis. We cannot legislate unpredictable irrationality, ambassador."

Full support.

Smith: This proposal has three main provisions: that conversion therapy should be banned in all circumstances, that conversion therapy should never be advertised, and that member states ought to support victims and likely victims of conversion therapy. I will submit this in the extremely near future if none of my fellow delegates find fault with it, with any of the provisions above, or with the disclaimer that gender affirmation therapy is not conversion therapy - which I hope will be increasingly the case now that references to an undefined concept of "gender expression" have been removed. Thanks, Suzie.

Trellania wrote:

Laka Strolistandiler wrote:I’m no BSDM practitioner, comrade. If I was one I would’nt have ended in my department- I probably wouldn’t even have had a job.

Which brings me to my next question: does this resolution believes that a person, being fully informed about the specifics and the consequences of his decision still has to be essentially protected from harming oneself?

Eh, it’s not like I am giver diplomatic immunity to begin with, so I don’t care...

"It is for the best. You look like someone who's will would shatter within the first ten minutes anyway.

"I do not believe any person of rational mind would make the decision this resolution seeks to outlaw to begin with. And those not of rational mind would not be of sufficient mindset to be making choices of their own free will anyway. So, I really don't see your question as having a possible answer due to its basis. We cannot legislate unpredictable irrationality, ambassador."

What do you exactly mean “shatter”? It’s not like receiving a shot from a canister shell during Third island War and living to tell the tale makes you a weak person, I hope you agree. And don’t even get me started on the wonders of trench medicine I had to endure...

Look, some people really don’t want to be what they are. My assistant for example is really dissatisfied with his race- and if he plans to change it via race-conversion therapy that’s his right. Sure, in your culture conversion therapy may be viewed as something demoniacal or outright wrong, however, in Lakan culture that’s as usual as, say, getting a shot. We are all for voluntary treatment of various mindsets and have both the will and the methods to do it.

"Strongly opposed. Here in Qhevak a large portion of their populace alters their own gender and sexual identity on the regular for fun and novelty, which can be easily and safely performed and reversed in short order with a neural lace. This is a horribly stifling restriction on personal mental autonomy."